My correspondent says ‘Not EM related as such but where does a good Samaritan stand legally if helping at an incident for example?’

Under the Australian Road Rules, which are incorporated into Victorian law by the Road Safety Road Rules 2009 (Vic) the various parking restrictions do not apply to an ‘emergency vehicle’ (r 307) but that won’t help a private citizen who stops their private car and gets out to help. For them, the relevant road rule is r 165 which says, amongst other things, that it is a defence if a:

… driver stops at a particular place, or in a particular way, to deal with a medical or other emergency, or to assist a disabled vehicle, and the driver stops for no longer than is necessary in the circumstances.

It is also a defence if:

… the driver stops at a particular place, or in a particular way, because the condition of the driver, a passenger, or the driver’s vehicle makes it necessary for the driver to stop in the interests of safety, and the driver stops for no longer than is necessary in the circumstances’.

A good Samaritan who stops to assist at an emergency therefore has a defence to an allegation of parking contrary to the relevant signs and parking restrictions. But note that it is a defence, it doesn’t mean that a ticket won’t be issued. One would expect too much to believe that the parking inspectors will, or can, identify in each case what the driver of an illegal parked car is doing and when that driver is assisting at an emergency. No doubt in some cases it will be obvious, but in some it will not. It will certainly be the case that they won’t identify what the driver was doing if the car is identified by ‘mounted cameras in vehicles’. That is akin to red light and speed cameras, they will be triggered when the breach is observed, the camera can’t tell what the driver is doing or, in the case of red light and speed cameras, whether it’s an ambulance or other emergency vehicle that is responding to an emergency.

If a ticket is issued it does not mean the driver is guilty of the offence. Whether you get a parking ticket or arrested for murder, it is just an allegation. In either case the police must prove their case beyond reasonable doubt, should the defendant chose to deny the allegation.

The first thing a good Samaritan who has received a parking infringement notice should do is follow the instructions on the back of the ticket and write a letter to the police or enforcement agency explaining the situation and providing whatever details and evidence they can to identify the emergency and that they were assisting. Information such as the identity of the police who were in attendance and a copy of any statement given to police that explains what they saw and their involvement in the event would help. If other people involved in the event can provide a supporting statement that would also help.

If the police or council don’t withdraw the penalty the driver can elect to take the matter to court. As the defendant, they have an evidentiary burden which means they have to give some evidence that they were stopped to assist at an emergency, but that could be nothing more than their own statement. Once the matter is raised, the police or council must prove, beyond reasonable doubt, that they were not assisting at the emergency or that they stopped for longer than was necessary in the circumstances.

That is no doubt inconvenient but as noted, you can’t expect that in every circumstance the parking enforcement officers will correctly identify what is going on. They will see a car parked contrary to the relevant signs and rules. If there is also a massive accident and lots of people helping they might infer that is what is going on but there are so many possibilities that it may well happen that even though the driver is assisting at an emergency, the parking officers, or the mounted camera, won’t identify that. It is for this reason that we have the rule of law, and courts. Police and council inspectors make allegations, ultimately it is courts, that have the chance to review all the evidence that everyone wants to bring, that determine guilt or innocence.

2 thoughts on “Parking to assist at an emergency”

Please can you update your recent post “Parking to assist at an emergency” for its applicability in Queensland?

I have been at an accident scene (in Queensland) in my own vehicle assisting the patient when a police officer started to book my car for being illegally parked. I was first on scene and parked my car on the wrong side of the road facing oncoming traffic to protect me and the patient (who was laying in the road) from oncoming traffic. By the time the police arrived all other services were there and it could have looked like I was parked inappropriately, albeit with hazard warning lights on! (I did manage to intervene before the officer had actually started the ticket so it didn’t go any further, but it could have done:-) )

As a followup related question, in the situation described above, if another vehicle travelling on its correct side of the road had an accident attributable to the location of my vehicle (eg swerved to avoid and went over the side causing significant injury/death, or collided with my vehicle (on the wrong side of the road, facing traffic with headlights and hazard warning lights on), would I be apportioned any blame in civil or criminal law (with or without police prosecution)? Would an insurance company take a dim view of a claim against my policy in these circumstances and refuse a claim?

The Road Rules are national, so the relevant rule in Queensland is the Transport Operations (Road Use Management—Road Rules) Regulation 2009 (Qld) r 165. So the answer is the same whether you’re in Victoria or Queensland (or any other state and territory).

I can’t say whether or not you would be found at fault in the event of another accident. It would depend on all the circumstances but also the position of any injured person. We all contribute to a fund to pay for people who are injured in road accidents – that’s the compulsory insurance we pay when we register our cars. The law says that if you cause an accident you are responsible for the natural and probable consequence of that action including injuries to good samaritans and the risk that people who come to help may make the situation worse (see for example, Champman v Hearse (1961) 106 CLR 112). So the person who is injured crashing into your car is probably better off suing the person who caused the original accident. But if there was no-one at fault in that accident and if the person’s actions are considered reasonable a judge may be inclined to find you at fault as that gives the injured person access to the compulsory third party insurance pool. Third party insurance covers any liability for personal injuries, cannot be refused by the insurer, and the premiums paid are not claims related so it doesn’t affect your next year’s registration if there is a claim – Motor Accident Insurance Act 1994 (Qld). So finding you ‘at fault’ doesn’t cost you, but does give the other driver access to the insurance pool. Sometimes judges bend the facts to find someone at fault to make sure an insured person is compensated. There is great merit in arguing that we should have no fault personal injuries insurance as New Zealand does, and as we are introducing across Australia at least for catastrophic injuries, but until then, this is the system.

As for property damage, that is a matter with you and your insurer but insurance companies can’t refuse a claim because they take a ‘dim view’ of the insured’s conduct. Insurance is there to pay out if you are fault – if it didn’t there would be no point to it. So the other driver may claim you were at fault and your insurer may meet that claim just because it’s cheaper and easier than defending it. I can’t say whether they would or would not. Whether they could avoid the claim would depend on the terms of the contract with the insurance company, but I can’t see how or why they would.